Converting animal waste to
methane to energy doesn't generally produce a lot of excitement.Usually, mentioning manure just leads to a
ho-hum or even a snicker.But more
people should be more interested in making more energy from manure.I think this is a technology whose time has
finally come.

Does that mean that biogas is
likely to generate enough energy to reduce prices at the gas pump or reverse
the rising cost of electricity?No, but
producing energy from waste can be a viable alternative to fossil fuel in
certain situations.At the very least,
capturing methane from manure deserves a second look from everyone who's
committed to reducing our nation's carbon footprint and increasing renewable
energy-conservationists, environmentalists and farmers and ranchers.

I recently spent three days at
the AgSTAR Conference in Syracuse concentrating on turning manure into energy.What's not to like about a process that results
in multiple environmental payoffs?Recycling
animal waste offers four major benefits:

- It destroys
methane gas, reducing greenhouse gases;

- It reduces
odor from manure storage;

- It improves
water quality; and

- It generates
energy.

Anaerobic digesters may produce
methane in sufficient quantities to be of interest to some power companies and
to help meet the desire for increasing access to renewable electrons while
reducing on-farm energy needs.And
community digesters may provide sufficient biogas to power local institutions
such as schools or prisons, without the need to worry about feeding into the
electrical grid.

I love energy from the sun and
wind, but solar power is only available about half the day, and windmills only
turn when the wind is blowing.Manure,
on the other hand, provides baseload power-it's available every day, and
methane can burn 24/7.

According to the Environmental
Protection Agency, in 2011, the 176 anaerobic digesters in the U.S. generated
the equivalent of 541 million kilowatt-hours of usable energy-enough to supply
more than 36,000 average American homes with power for a year.At the same time, the digesters destroyed 1.2
million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent gases and avoided production
of an additional 301,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide by reducing the need for
fossil fuels.That is the same as
removing nearly 300,000 passenger cars from the road or reducing U.S. gasoline
consumption by almost 170 million gallons.

A handful of states with a
favorable regulatory climate and strong environmental commitment are leading
the way in encouraging biogas projects that are profitable.Others should follow suit.

Biogas production offers an
excellent opportunity for public investment to help put digesters in place
through programs offered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the
Farm Service Agency, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture and Rural
Development.The U.S. Department of the
Treasury also offers a cash grant program for renewable energy projects.

In addition to these agencies, we
need greater involvement of the Agricultural Research Service and the Economic
Research Service to fund and direct research that can identify cost-effective
ways to remove fertilizer-nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium-from
effluent.Advancing the technology will
increase profitability and further promote installation of digesters.

When Congress finally sits down
and writes the 2012 farm bill they need to create equity for renewable energy
sources in the farm bill authorized programs.Many of USDA's programs to support renewable energy were crafted with
ethanol, wind or solar in mind.It is
time to reform the programs to enable all forms of renewable energy.It is time to end restrictions in biomass
programs that don't consider manure to be biomass.It is time to make sure that evaluation of a
project's deliverables consider environmental benefits of water quality and
methane destruction.Most importantly,
we should adequately fund these programs.

We can improve air and water
quality, increase fuel conservation and boost renewable energy by making the
most of manure.This is a sensible
approach that we need to encourage.

About
the author: Bruce I.
Knight, Principal, Strategic Conservation Solutions, was the Under Secretary
for Marketing and Regulatory Programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) from 2006 to 2009. From 2002 to 2006, Knight served as Chief of Natural
Resources Conservation Service. The South Dakota native worked on Capitol Hill
for Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, Rep. Fred Grandy, Iowa, and Sen. James
Abdnor, South Dakota. In addition, Knight served as vice president for public
policy for the National Corn Growers Association and also worked for the
National Association of Wheat Growers. A third-generation rancher and farmer
and lifelong conservationist, Knight operates a diversified grain and cattle
operation using no-till and rest rotation grazing systems.

In this week’s Open Mic, Ambassador Darci Vetter, Chief Agriculture Negotiator with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, provides an update on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPA) negotiations, as well as the ongoing Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) talks. Vetter says the nation’s agriculture industry cannot afford to be isolated from the other ninety-five percent of the globe’s population or growth in its middle class. Support from farmers and ranchers will be crucial in advancing an ambitious trade agenda, she adds.